Friday, October 31, 2008

It is one of the main themes around here that if the slurrers keep it up, they will certainly break it. You can't blame it on the McCain campaign, or the Republican Party - Organized American Zionism has its fingerprints all over this. Someday, after Israel is long gone, you'll wonder why you threw the slur away.

(Some) White Supremacists for Obama. BTW, what's the over/under for the number of days after the election that McCain dies?

Yet more bullshit archaeology. I have a piece of candy that's been carbon-dated to the time of the Great Pumpkin.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

A possible explanation for the American attack on Syria is that it had nothing to do with the particular target, but was the last chance for the neocons to extend the 'Bush Doctrine' to include the concept that the Americans don't have to recognize national sovereignty if they are in 'hot pursuit'.

The idea that Syria secretly agreed to the attack is still kickingaround. Of course, this could be Zionist propaganda. On the other hand, Syria and the U. S. are much closer than either will admit since the neocons have been largely deposed in Washington, and I find it hard to believe that the new order of adult rule in the United States would risk losing Syrian cooperation for some lowly smuggler. We also have to remember that the Israelis proved, last September, that the Syrians have working air defense (that's the only reason why Israel hasn't attacked Syria), and it wouldn't have looked very good for the Americans if they lost a couple helicopters. Maybe Syria agreed to turn off the radar for a few hours.

The anti-democratic elite forces are using the Canadian election to shill for their 'proportional representation'. Fortunately, Canadians are smarter than that (I still owe you a post mortem on the Canadian election).

Forensic economics. This is much less useful these days, as derivatives allow you to take positions based on insider knowledge which can be completely opaque to any investigator.

Dr Gerald Toben won the first stage of his persecution based, it seems, on completely sloppy work by whoever drew up the arrest warrant (the 'world-wide internet'!) . Do you think the sloppiness could be intentional? Are prosecutors starting to resist being used as pawns for this crap, which is, after all, just a tool in the holocaust - the undeniable one that is going on now - against the Palestinians?

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

I understand that the current banking crisis is causing an upswing in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, something which promises to get worse (or better!) as the effects of the depression start to hit home. It's kinda hilarious to hear Abe Foxman et al complain about this, as the cameras swing over roomfuls of banksters who both caused the problem and will be receiving trillions of dollars to 'fix' it (talk about moral hazard!), ninety percent of who are Jewish (and I write this as somebody who doesn't believe this is a Jewish conspiracy!). Alan Greenspan seems to have been inspired so much by Ayn Rand that he saw each bankster entrepreneur as a John Galt held back by the stiflings of government regulation. Could the deep problem really be Jewish supremacism, filtered through the two secular Jews, Rand and Greenspan, into a new religion of capitalism, with the replacement 'chosen people', the supreme beings who must never be repressed, the richest entrepreneurs? There is something deeply irrational in Greenspan's faith in the ability of the capitalist system to regulate itself. Did he just take the supremacism he grew up with and change its focus?

They waited a while, hoping it might work, but we're now seeing a tsunami of old-school Republicans endorsing Obama. The tragictruth - that their old Republican Party has been taken over in a secret bloodless coup by the Christian Zionists - has finally hit home (the comment thread on my original posting is one of the wildest - not to mention longest - ever, consisting of a discussion of the "the famous BRZEZINSKI SOROS FACTION" - ! - for which I am apparently covering, and back pain health advice). Don't feel sorry for them: they made their deal with the devil in order to obtain the votes they couldn't get as their policies were so far from the class interests of 95% of the voters. Poor old McCain - who didn't even know Palin when they selected her for him - is left with the sinking realization that she is not even campaigning for him, she is campaigning as a future talk-show host, Senator (she'll re-take the seat that the crooked and convicted Ted Stevens is about to lose), and, eventually, Christian Zionist President of the United States (or so they wish). Isn't it curious that the culmination of the destruction of Barry Goldwater's Republican Party occurs on the watch of John McCain, who was practically Goldwater's adopted son?

A very big Republican loss would be very good for the United States, not because the Democrats will be much better (they won't), but because it will entail a complete reevaluation by the old-school Republicans of the fundamental nature of their party, and the forced removal of the Christian fruitcakes from mainstream American politics.

Notice how the Israelis have started to adjust their own politics in light of their acceptance that an Obama win is inevitable. Livni couldn't create her coalition as the joint Israeli generals/American Jewish Billionaires committee, the High Cabal, decided that they needed the hard-assiest of hard asses, Bibi, to 'manage' Obama (the Shas party was ordered to sink any chances of Livni governing). Now that the Old American Establishment has decided that the first step in reestablishing the destroyed American 'brand' is to be seen as being helpful in the Middle East, Bibi's the only one the Cabal could trust not to give in to the American pressure to agree to some kind of peace agreement (peace is the death of Zionism). Livni may beahead, but with the ridiculous proportional electoral system in Israel, it is a Netanhayu coaltion which will be running things, and blocking any attempts at peace. As always in Israel, things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.

Monday, October 27, 2008

The American attack on Syrian territory seems to have come as a shock, even to those who like to talk about an 'October surprise'. Is that piffle what an 'October surprise' looks like? Is another bombing of civilians the new standard of American incompetence? Was it an attempt to help McCain's dead campaign? Was it a last lashing out by the frustrated and largely emasculated neocons? Was it their attempt to start a World War, hoping against hope that the Syrians would act completely contrary to form and risk a suicidal retaliation? Was it a last-minute diplomatic 'gift' for the hated Obama? Nothing really feels right.

On the other hand, we shouldn't be looking at this as an aberration. The United States is currently conducting all-out wars against Somalia and Pakistan and (arguably) Iran, up to and including having (sub rosa) boots on the ground, and all without declaring war. Americans dropping bombs on civilians in other countries happens all the time. Acts of war without declaring war is the new style in the Pentagon. If you are an American military strategist, facing the huge problem of extracting yourself from Iraq and Afghanistan, all without appearing to have been kicked out by the Iraqi government, or beaten out by the Taliban, the prospect of having all the benefits of war without any of the responsibilities must be very appealing. The Americans are good at starting wars, but have no clue how to end them. Wars aren't popular with the people who run the United States now, so alternatives are welcome.

The Americans claim to have a problem with insurgents crossing the border from Syria to Iraq, and then taking shelter in Syria. The American action looks like a targeted assassination of a specific individual (of course, we'll never hear a name). The Americans have learned from the Israelis that it does not matter how many innocent civilians you slaughter as long as you come close-ish to hitting your intended target. You could call it incompetence (especially since it keeps happening), but it is closer to a racist indifference to life.

There is another big alternative explanation. The Syrians seem to be trying to help the Americans, but don't actually have control of the tribal border areas. It is quite possible that the Syrians secretly approved an American operation to take out a particular individual. Syria can hardly admit that it doesn't control its own borders, or that there are insurgents in Syria who don't like the central government. Syria also can't be seen to accept an attack by a foreign country on its own civilians. Thus, it allows the American attack and pretends to be angry, while limiting the actual diplomatic response.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

The rats, having failed in doing everything they could to sink the good ship Obama, are scurrying as fast as theirlittle legs will take them off the McCain Titanic, and have a new plan. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, and start the prep to direct him to your newest genocidal plans. Thus the efforts of lite Zionist Dennis Ross to begin the process of neoconizationof Obama policy positions on the Middle East, starting with Iran. It won't work, as Obama works for the Old American Establishment, and the Old American Establishment has made it abundantly clear that there won't be any more Wars For The Jews. Dennis Ross' involvement in this trickery has probably queered whatever chance he had to be secretary of state (much desired by the Cabal, as Ross' status as a 'lite' allows him to pass as a sane person, something no longer available to the recognized neocons), and in fact the timing of these shenanigans was very clumsy, perhaps representing a bit of panic in Organized American Zionism.

"The Bush administration will announce in mid-November, after the presidential election, that it intends to establish the first U.S. diplomatic presence in Iran since the 1979-81 hostage crisis, according to senior Bush administration officials.

The proposal for an 'interests section,' which falls short of a full U.S. Embassy, has been conveyed in private diplomatic messages to Iran, and a search is under way to choose the American diplomat who would head the post, the officials said."

Oh, sorry, that's a sign of the non-apocalypse. Didn't the neocons - Pipes comes to mind (use number 4 above to describe him to the authorities) - as part of all the 'Iran talk' tell us that Bush would use this period to start a war with Iran?

Thursday, October 23, 2008

There are twoarticles out recently, both inspired by the work of the great James Bamford, on the curious fact that corporations tightly connected to the Israeli Mossad have been hired by the Americans to work on various activities related to communications within the United States, including data mining, and tapping phones, faxes, and internet traffic (some people also remember that Israeli companies were running security at various places connected with September 11). Impolite anti-Semites are wondering out loud whether there is even the slightest possibility that some of this data is making its way back to Israel. You think? We know the Israelis conduct extensive spying on the United States and Americans, which includes industrial espionage and, no doubt, helping the extasy dealers - practically the Israeli national industry - from avoiding capture (that's why the 'art students' tended to hang around DEA offices). The anti-American ultra-pro-Zionist behavior of many Americans, particularly politicians and journalists, also evidences Israeli blackmail. The most naive idiot in the world couldn't avoid concluding that it is an extremely dumb idea to entrust all your secrets to a country with a track record of misusing them.

Remember the 'anonymizing' service that turned out to be run by the CIA? The best part was that people continued to use it even after the CIA connection was revealed! After all, if you can't trust the CIA with information you wish to keep secret, who can you trust? This type of thing is what intelligence organizations do. They set up ostensibly private corporations to do the dirty work they can't do themselves. You shouldn't blame the Israelis. Information is so easy to obtain from the trusting Americans that it is just too tempting.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

A prominent member of the British Conservatives, George Osborne, allegedly tried to solicit an illegal political donation from one of the richest men in the world, Oleg Deripaska, described as a 'Russian billionaire'. I guess it is OK to slur the Russians and the Billionaires, but we're left with a description which may miss the point.

While the allegations have beendenied, the most curious aspect of the story is the identity of the allegator, one Nat Rothschild, described as a 'chum' of the money-seeking Conservative, and a guy who made over a billion of his own from his connections to the 'Russian'. Whenever we see the Rothschilds, the most infamous of the 'Court Jews' (and the family which inspired the wild rumor that the Jews start wars in order to benefit from lending the money to fight them), it starts to look like a parody of anti-Semitism. If Rothschild is indeed a 'chum' of Osborne, what the hell is he up to?

This is very good George Packer on the seemingly paradoxical habit of the members of the working class in the United States to vote against their 'class interests' (found via Undernews; my emphasis in red):

"Until the mid-seventies, the white working class - the heart of the New Deal coalition - voted largely Democratic. Since the Carter years, the percentages have declined from sixty to forty, and this shift has roughly coincided with the long hold of the Republican Party on the White House. The white working class - a group that often speaks of itself, and is spoken of, as forgotten, marginalized, even despised - is the golden key to political power in America, and it voted overwhelmingly for George W. Bush twice, by seventeen per cent in 2000 and twenty-three per cent in 2004. Thomas Frank's 2004 book 'What’s the Matter with Kansas?' directed its indignation at the baffling phenomenon of millions of Americans voting year after year against their economic self-interest. He concluded that the Republican Party had tricked working people with a relentless propaganda campaign based on religion and morality, while Democrats had abandoned these voters to their economic masters by moving to the soft center of the political spectrum. Frank’s book remains the leading polemic about the white reaction - the title alone has, for many liberals, become shorthand for the conventional wisdom - but it is hobbled by the condescending argument that tens of millions of Americans have become victims of a 'carefully cultivated derangement,' or are simply stupid.

Last year, four sociologists at the University of Arizona, led by Lane Kenworthy, released a paper that complicates Frank's thesis. Their study followed the voting behavior of the forty-five per cent of white Americans who identify themselves as working class. Mining electoral data from the General Social Survey, they found that the decline in white working-class support for Democrats occurred in one period - from the mid-seventies until the early nineties, with a brief lull in the early eighties - and has remained well below fifty per cent ever since. But they concluded that social issues like abortion, guns, religion, and even (outside the South) race had little to do with the shift. Instead, according to their data, it was based on a judgment that - during years in which industrial jobs went overseas, unions practically vanished, and working-class incomes stagnated - the Democratic Party was no longer much help to them. 'Beginning in the mid-to-late 1970s, there was increasing reason for working-class whites to question whether the Democrats were still better than the Republicans at promoting their material well-being,' the study’s authors write. Working-class whites, their fortunes falling, began to embrace the anti-government, low-tax rhetoric of the conservative movement. During Clinton’s Presidency, the downward economic spiral of these Americans was arrested, but by then their identification with the Democrats had eroded. Having earlier moved to the right for economic reasons, the Arizona study concluded, the working class stayed there because of the rising prominence of social issues - Thomas Frank's argument. But the Democrats fundamentally lost the white working class because these voters no longer believed the Party’s central tenet - that government could restore a sense of economic security."

Once the two parties were judged - correctly, more or less, despite the fact that historical data shows that the average person does do better under Democrats - to be identically unfriendly to the working class on economic issues, the voters fell back to considering which party better matched their views on social issues. Voters weren't so much dumb as doing what they could with the poor choice with which they were presented. The Republicans are now on the outs as their obvious and overwhelming incompetence on economic issues - largely caused, of course, by their propensity to fight Wars For The Jews - has made the Democrats the safer choice for economic security.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Still in transition - I could tell stories of the criminal activity of large corporations - but I couldn't resist a Hoon quote:

"Transport secretary Geoff Hoon said last night that if the government is not able to harvest details of all internet communications, society will have granted terrorists a licence to kill.

Appearing on BBC One's Question Time, the journeyman minister was asked by Liberal Democrat MP and fellow panellist Julia Goldsworthy how far the government is willing to go undermine civil liberties to monitor extremists. An irritated Hoon snapped: 'To stop terrorists killing people in our society quite a long way, actually.'"

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Prime Minister Harper was suddenly in a great hurry in the late summer to come up with bogus reasons for the necessity of calling a quick election - a call which actually violated his own government's rather stupid institution of American-inspired fixed election terms - claiming that the minority government situation was unworkable (not true, and all the problems with it were caused by the actions of the Conservatives in tying up Parliamentary committees to prevent those committees from investigating Conservative corruption, including very important corruption involving the electoral process). It turned out that Harper's haste was due to the impending American financial crisis, and he was no doubt tipped off by his Washington handlers that he needed a quick election to beat the collapse of the Canadian economy caused by the intended collapse of the American economy. As it happened, his timing was off, and the American implosion has had an impact on the Canadian election, with Harper's 'sink or swim' extreme laissez-faire ideas not looking so good in the teeth of an economic storm.

As I've already noted, the bias in the disgusting Canadian media in favor of the Conservatives was so bad as to be unbelievable, and in fact appears to have backfired rather badly. Almost all the polling results have been either crooked or incompetent. Although most polls have shown the Conservatives well ahead, in some cases with support twice that of the Liberals, the honest pollster, Nanos, has shown the parties to have been rather close in support throughout the election campaign. The plan, of course, was to convince Canadians to vote Conservative by making it seem that a Conservative majority was inevitable, and not only inevitable, but desirable to most Canadians (the main problem the Conservative have is the completely accurate perception that their real policies, their 'secret agenda', is so radically right-wing as to be 'scary' to the average Canadian voter). The bogus poll results, backed up by over-the-top unfair criticisms of Liberal leader Dion, was supposed to guide Canadians to a Conservative majority. Fortunately, Canadians have a long-standing cantankerous streak, and don't like being told what to do, particularly when the media make the conspiracy so obvious.

The larger Conservative plan is actually even more dangerous than just manipulating Canadians to a Conservative majority, and has no doubt come directly from Washington political advisers. Jean Chrétien's admirable election financing reforms have made it impossible to finance political parties by going to big business, and the Liberals have been slow off the mark in generating the kind of direct mail campaigns required to bring in small donations from many individual donors. Federal election funding is based on the votes obtained in the most recent election. Harper's plan was to permanently destroy the Liberals as a political party by reducing their support so much that they would never be able to repay their indebtedness. That would leave the Conservatives constantly running against the NDP, the socialists, who have no real chance of winning an election, which would make the Conservatives the governing party of Canada for the foreseeable future. No matter what you think of the Liberals, Harper's plan would be an unmitigated disaster for Canada, and must be stopped at all costs.

It should be noted that the Liberals, under Dion, have put forth one of the most truly progressive platforms they have ever had. In particular, the Green Shift, the environmental plan that is really extremely weak from an environmental point of view (but it is scalable!), represents a huge income redistribution shift from the rich to the poor and middle class (this may be what really scares Harper's American political advisers, who already see Canada as a bad influence, particularly that damned heath care system). In fact, in totality the Liberal platform is more truly progressive than the platform of the NDP, who have been sunk by the arrogance of their current leader and difficulties they have with some of their union constituents, who have a foolish and short-sighted problem with environmentalism (and some of whom have made so much money in the past few years of boom times that they no longer consider themselves to be 'working class'). The only platform more truly progressive than the Liberals is that of the Green Party. Since this is the Green Party's first election as a true Green Party, they are not yet ready to be a real political player (but the votes they get will lead to federal funding which will help them become more powerful). I should note that the Conservatives and the NDP both tried to block the leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, from participating in the debates, and she only was allowed to participate because of massive popular opinion.

The conspiracy theory is that if Dion becomes Prime Minister he will appoint May to the Senate, and use that appointment to make her Environment Minister (an almost perfect scenario, and a huge improvement from the closet-case Conservative Minister of the Environment, who should be called the Minister of Pollution). In return, May is semi-secretly calling for strategic voting, i. e., voting for the candidate in each district who is most likely to defeat the Conservative. Proponents of electoral reform call strategic voting a bug, but it is obviously one of the huge features of a first-past-the-post system, keeping the causal connection between the vote and the effect of the vote in the hands of the individual voter (never forget that the primary goal of elite electoral reformers is to destroy that causal connection, ideally in their view making it impossible for an individual voter to know what the effect of his vote will be).

If for no other reason than to stop the Harper plan to destroy any effective opposition to his Christian evangelist, Republican-inspired, extreme right-wing party (so far hiding in the weeds, waiting for their chance to wreck havoc), and not to mention that a Liberal minority government under Dion (with May as Environment Minister) has a good chance to be a very progressive government, I'm hoping that Canadians show the good common sense they have always had and vote for sanity. Canadians only have to look south to see what happens when you stop paying attention and vote selfishly and foolishly.

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Haider's caris in pretty good shape considering all it has been through. You'd expect no less of that type of big European-made luxury automobile, the safest automobiles ever made (a lot of reports said his car was a Mercedes S-Class, others a Volkswagen Phaeton, but through the damage it looks more like the VW, and after all, would Haider drive anything other than a VW?). It looks like the rescuers took the doors off in their attempt to treat him and remove him from the car. You can see the deployed front airbag (and presumably the side airbag also deployed), and, if you look closely, the deployed roof airbag. There is a bit of a ding above the driver, but the basic framework of the car, intended to protect passengers, is intact. The front tire is oddly askew (cause of, or result of, the accident?).

Note that Haider was involved in an earlier crash, his survival attributed to the fact that he always bucked his seatbelt (look for 'buckled' on this thread). His injuries are supposed to be to the chest (what about the airbag?) and to the head (airbag, again, and how did he hit his head if he had his seat belt on?). "Medics said the impact of the crash was so great that he suffered 'extreme' injuries, with his left arm almost severed from his body." I would have thought the severed-arm thing might have made it into accounts of his injuries, which always describe head and chest! Is an almost severed arm consistent with the state of the car? The car maker should should sue for defamation.

Traveling alone also seems a little odd to me. Wouldn't a guy like Haider have some pretty serious death threats, and require some kind of bodyguard? Who knew he would be traveling alone, if in fact he was?

So the Austrian right - which is really extreme right (neo-Nazis, etc) - including Haider's own party, has an extremely successful election, and a few weeks later Haider, travelingalone in his car manages to run into a concrete post and kill himself? The conspiricies should start flying on this one.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

Jonathan Cook describes (or here) the Israeli best seller When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? There does not appear to have been any serious attempt to refute the main points made by its author, Shlomo Sand (who waited until he was a professor to publish the book, as "There is a price to be paid in Israeli academia for expressing views of this sort."):

the idea that Jews existed as a people separate from their religion is completely new, with no basis in Jewish thought, and was created by Zionist ideologues in the nineteenth century (presumably inspired by the popularity of various ethnic nationalisms in vogue at the time, concepts which caused great tragedy in the following century);

the kingdoms of David and Solomon are legends;

there never was an exile as the Romans did not exile people and all evidence shows that the Jews stayed on their lands (other have pointed out that there never was an expulsion from Egypt as no contemporary Egyptian records make mention of it, and the whole concept of exodus is fishy as the area where Moses supposedly headed, Palestine, was also under Egyptian control at the time);

the idea of exile may have come from early Christians, who used it as a conversion tool in explaining that the exile was punishment from God;

the modern Zionist idea of Jews being obligated to return from exile to the Promised Land was entirely alien to Judaism, and is in fact senseless as there was no exile to return from (the history of Jews spreading around the world comes from the religious necessity of the time of proselytizing);

most of today's Jews have no historical connection to Israel;

"It is not taught in Israeli schools but most of the early Zionist leaders, including David Ben Gurion [Israel's first prime minister], believed that the Palestinians were the descendants of the area's original Jews. They believed the Jews had later converted to Islam."

Here is more Cook, this time on the misuse of Biblical archaeology in the 'City of David'.

Sunday, October 05, 2008

The mysterious murder of Eugene Mallove, cold fusion expert, has taken a peculiar turn, and now even lacks patsies.

Richard Fuld, on Barron's 'World's Best CEOs' list just last year, wonders why Lehman Brothers was singled out for death, while everyone else made out like bandits snatching those billions fresh off the US Treasury printing presses. Since the whole thing appears to be little more than a Goldman Sachs enrichment program, Lehman Brothers may have been 'disappeared' simply to remove a competitor.

The tale of Ashraf Marwan, the guy who took a header from his Mayfair flat, has come back to life. His shoes and his memoirs are still missing.

No big surprise that Palin is connected to the same group of crazy Christians who have infected much of Congress, including Hillary.

I'm way overdue to comment on the Canadian election, which is full of conspiracy angles, including the most over-the-top efforts by the you-know-who-controlled media I have ever seen to spin the election for the Conservatives, efforts so obvious they have started to backfire.

The other fruit company, Standard Fruit (now Dole), also has an interesting hidden history. From Time (!) in 1933 (things were different then):

"The rise & fall of the Union Indemnity group was written in the last ten years. But its roots go deep in New Orleans lore, back to the Brothers Vaccaro - Joseph, Lucca and Felix - who emigrated from Italy some 40 years ago to found one of the greatest fortunes on the Gulf Coast. Old Joe Vaccaro started as a field hand on a plantation far down the Mississippi Delta. His daughter married one Salvador D'Antoni who sailed a lugger on the river. Soon the Vaccaros pooled their funds and chartered a leaky schooner, sent Son-in-Law D'Antoni to Central America for bananas. The venture was a little gold mine. Presently the Vaccaros bought a battered tramp steamer. Bananas boomed. The Vaccaros acquired a fleet of modern ships, bought up banana plantations in Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua. Panama. Swart, stocky, with soft voices, the Vaccaros are now in their 70's, are still known as shrewd traders. Until after the War they tended strictly to their banana business.

Then the Brothers Moss - Mike (not Michael) and Washington Irving - worked their way into the good graces of the Brothers Vaccaro. The Mosses ran a small insurance agency inherited from their father. Mike Moss persuaded the Vaccaros to invest their millions in things other than bananas. They bought the famed Grunewald Hotel, paying for it with Liberty Bonds dug out of a safety deposit box. They rebuilt it as the Roosevelt, 'biggest hotel in the Deep South.' Mike Moss, a tun-bellied man with a tiny bald head, was made manager. The Vaccaros backed Union Indemnity with slender, bespectacled, drawling Brother Irving Moss as president. New Orleans, where race is viewed frankly, chuckled: 'Watch what happens now! The Jews have got their hooks in the Dagoes.'

Though the Mosses had made no noise in New Orleans finance before, they now began to hum. And the Vaccaros hummed, too. While Union Indemnity was acquiring satellites right & left, the Vaccaros were diversifying their interests by buying: the world's biggest oxygen plant, an oil refinery, a smart tailor shop, an ice plant, a laundry, an undertaking establishment. In 1926 they sold out part of their banana kingdom to the public as Standard Fruit & Steamship, now United Fruit Co.'s only important competitor. The deal was engineered by Irving Moss, by this time regarded as something of a financial genius, assisted by his good friend President Rudolf S. Hecht of Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. Standard Fruit stock was issued at $100 a share, promptly slumped to $10.

Meantime Mike Moss had hired a shoe store clerk named Seymour Weiss, distant kin, as pressagent for his Hotel Roosevelt. The best publicity job Seymour Weiss ever did was to provide free and luxurious quarters for Huey Long, thereby wangling himself into the Governor's retinue. Governor Long made him Colonel Weiss and an important gumshoe henchman. Colonel Weiss was elected a director of Union Indemnity.

The crash of the Union Indemnity group last week was caused by the exuberant overexpansion of Irving Moss and poor investments."

Thursday, October 02, 2008

The success of Organized American Zionism - success which appears to be rapidly unraveling, by the way, to the extent that I may have to eventually support the underdog and call myself a Zionist (of course, then it will be fashionable to be an anti-Semite, as the slurrers always follow power)! - is compelling us to reinvent American progressive history, long benighted by the influence of Noam. It is curious that much of the impetus of critiques of American imperialism came out of American interference in the politics of Central America. The standard Noamian 'progressive' line was that the U. S. was using its power to advance the interests of the 'American Establishment'. This causes a moment's consternation, as it is difficult to imagine what interest the 'American establishment' would have in Central America. The answer is fruit, particularly the American fruit companies Standard Brands (now Dole) and United Fruit (now ChiquitaBrands). We'll have to leave aside for now the big question of why the American Empire would spend so much money and psychic energy, not to mention so much of its reputation, looking out for two fruit companies, an issue which resembles the question of why the American Empire would have recently destroyed itself advancing the interests of the Israeli Settler Movement.

Consider United Brands. During the two worst times of involvement in Central America, it was run by two men, the first of which, Samuel Zemurray, used a wildmercenary army in the 1911 to replace the government of Honduras, against the express warnings of the U. S. Secretary of State (this was long before Zemurray had effectively taken control of United Fruit when it bought out his fruit company in 1929), and a similar technique in the 1950s in Guatemala (this time with the help of the CIA). Look what Zemurray was up to in 1948:

"Samuel Zemurray lets one of the company's ships to participate in the settlement of Jews in Palestine after the war. The ship was re-baptized with the name of Exodus and carried the first wave of Jewish immigrants to the Middle East"

Zemurray was also a pioneer in the combination of Zionism and American 'progressive' politics, having helped to start the faux-progressive Nation magazine. That 'progressive'-Zionist coalition continues to haunt us.

The man in charge of United Brands/Chiquita during American imperialist involvement in Central America during the 70s and 80s (and up to this day) was Carl H. Lindner, Jr., a rather religious Baptist, but with a big Zionist slant (from an article from 2004):

"Jewish leaders from across America traveled to Cincinnati Sunday to honor Reds owner Carl Lindner for his contributions to one of the signature programs to help the Israeli government.

Lindner, a Baptist, is the biggest non-Jewish buyer of State of Israel bonds, which Israel has used to raise $25 billion for everything from agriculture to shipping to communications.

Supporters raised more than $71.5 million at the event, including pledges of $10 million from Western & Southern Financial Group and more than $5 million from Lindner and his wife, Edyth.

'Mr. Lindner, I hope that some day you will be able to visit Israel, a country we all love, and see for yourself the many miracles you've helped make possible,' said Bobbie Goldstein, national chair of the Israel Bonds campaign.

"Lindner has said an early loan from Sir Isaac Wolfson, founder of the mail-order giant Great Universal Stores, inspired him to support Jewish causes."

There is a curious parallel between Chiquita support for right-wing paramilitary units in Colombia, and similar Israeli government supportandtraining for the same paramilitaries (see here and the first comment; there were identical Israeli efforts to support the murderers during the 'Dirty War' in Argentina; for the wider drug-smuggling picture, see here).

If Organized American Zionism keeps pressing the issue (viz., its recently accelerated propaganda efforts for an American attack on Iran), we will have to systematically reexamine all of recent American history from a Zionist angle, removing the intentionally misleading spin put on it by 'progressive' critics of the American Empire.